>>36144158First, let me acknowledge your anger at being confronted with facts, because I think that is conspicuous enough to deserve notice.
Second, this isn't really "sciencey' since these facts obeservable to any layperson were known millenia before science existed; thats how obvious they were.
Third, no, evolution, such as it is, does not take a hundred years. A person reading with skills for comprehension would not make that inference. What is being conveyed is that it should not be much longer until comprehension of language is deteriorated so much further that its abandoned completely and we are left with babbling primates incapable of communicating lucid thought whatsoever beyond 'me want thing' like infants.
As this entire exchange has thus far proven.
